Rowland is trying to estimate how far in the building the man is stood, which is quite a tricky thing to estimate as he states himself.
His early estimation is 12-15ft but on reflection he changes this to 3-5ft. It is this single detail that is leapt upon to try to undermine his testimony. Otherwise he is perfectly consistent with what he tells his wife at the time and the subsequent statements he makes concerning the description of the man with the rifle. He gives a detailed description of the man and to argue that he couldn't have seen the man if he was stood 15ft inside the building doesn't mean he was describing a man he couldn't see - it means his estimation of how far the man was stood away from the window is wrong.
His wife confirms the description he gave on the day and his incorrect estimate of how far the man was stood in the building.
You're still misunderstanding Rowland's response to that question. He wasn't saying there was three feet of space above the head of the man with the rifle, he is estimating that his head is three feet away from the window. Consistent with his revised estimation of the man being stood 3-5ft inside the building.
He is not saying he could see a 3ft space vertically above the head of the man!
If the arguments you are trying to make were taken at face value, Rowland would be describing a man whose head was below his waist.
Apart from a revised estimation of how far the man with the rifle was stood in the building, Rowland's description of him is consistent and confirmed by the testimony of his wife who confirms he made the same description before the motorcade had even arrived!
It does not matter what Arnold tells his wife. His whole testimony on many different subjects was shown to be false. It was a BS story to her and then he tried to tell the same BS story to Specter and the WC and his description of the person in the window is not possible with a window opening of 2.5 feet and the window installed 14" above the floor and Specter knew it.
He is not estimating anything but the distance above the persons head as seen through the open window. Nothing about his description is possible given the window opening being 14" from the floor.
Mr. SPECTER -
What is your best estimate of the space between the top of his head and the open window at the perspective you were observing?Mr. ROWLAND - Two and a half, three feet, something on that--that is something very hard to ascertain. That would just be an estimation on my part.
"If the arguments you are trying to make were taken at face value, Rowland would be describing a man whose head was below his waist."
That is exactly the point.
Specter knew from the beginning that Rowland had no idea about the install of the windows placing them 14" off the floor. He asked him early in the interview if he had been in the building.
Mr. SPECTER - Were you familiar with that building prior to November 22, 1963?
Mr. ROWLAND - Yes; I have been in there on occasion.
Mr. SPECTER - You have been in the building?
Mr. ROWLAND - Yes, to purchase books.
Mr. SPECTER - When were you in the building most recently prior to November 22, 1963?
Mr. ROWLAND - Within the first week of November. This was to buy a physics notebook.
Mr. SPECTER - What part of the building were you in at that time?
Mr. ROWLAND - Just inside the door of the main lobby.
Mr. SPECTER - On the first floor?
Mr. ROWLAND - Yes.
Mr. SPECTER - Had you ever had occasion at any time to be on any floor other than the first floor?
Mr. ROWLAND - No.In the end it does not matter about Rowland's made up story. It ultimately has no impact on the understanding of the asassination. It turns out there really was a sniper on the 6th floor but Arnold never saw him.
